Assistive technologies: aspects influencing assurance and abandonment of resources

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2317-0190.v25i4a163858

Keywords:

Orthotic Devices, Artificial Limbs, Wheelchairs, Exercise Therapy, Occupational Therapy

Abstract

Assistive Technologies are resources used to enhance functional abilities and provide autonomy and independence. Persons with disabilities are guaranteed access to these resources, with prescription from professionals in the rehabilitation services of the Unified Health System (SUS). Objective: Check aspects involved with adhesion and abandonment of orthoses, prostheses and wheelchairs. Method: This was a cross-sectional study, the data were collected through a structured interview that questions the prescription process, benefits and continuity or abandonment of use of the equipment’s. The study population were individuals aged 18 to 80 years who received assistive technologies dispensed in the period from January to December of 2017 through a Specialized Center in Rehabilitation, of the municipality of Santa Maria - RS. Results: In 2017,400 equipment were dispensed, being interviewed 31 people of this amount, since many of the beneficiaries do not reside in the municipality, not consenting to participate. The 31 people received 38 equipment, 6 motorized chairs, 13 manuals, 8 lower limb prostheses, 1 upper limb, 7 lower limb orthoses and 3 upper limbs. Of these, 20 were still used and 18 were abandoned. The most reported benefits were improved stability and facilitation of resource displacement. Conclusion: The majority of the beneficiaries were adults and the elderly, and the manual chair and the lower limb prosthesis were the most dispensed equipment. It was verified that there was a significant number of abandonment suggesting that inadequacies occurred at the moment of prescription, resulting in the abandonment.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Organização Mundial de Saúde. Relatório mundial sobre a deficiência. São Paulo: SEDPcD; 2012.

Oliveira LMB. Cartilha do Censo Demográfico de 2010. Brasília (DF): SDH-PR/SNPD; 2012.

Gaudenzi P, Ortega F. Problematizando o conceito de deficiência a partir das noções de autonomia e normalidade. Ciên Saúde Colet. 2016;21(10):3061-70. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1413-812320152110.16642016

Brasil. Lei n. 13.146 de 6 de julho de 2015. Institui a Lei Brasileira de Inclusão da Pessoa com Deficiência (Estatuto da Pessoa com Deficiência). Diário Oficial da República Federativa do Brasil, Brasília (DF): 2015 Jul 7; Seção 1:2-11.

Bersch R. Introdução à tecnologia assistiva. Porto Alegre: CEDI; 2013.

Silva MGC. Causas de abandono de dispositivos de tecnologia assistiva [Monografia]. Brasília: Universidade de Brasília; 2016.

Parant A, Schiano-Lomoriello S, Marchan F. How would I live with a disability? Expectations of bio-psychosocial consequences and assistive technology use. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2017;12(7):681-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2016.1218555

Federici S, Meloni F, Borsci S. The abandonment of assistive technology in Italy: a survey of National Health Service users. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2016;52(4):516-26.

Ferreira ABH. Novo Aurélio Século XXI: o dicionário da língua portuguesa. Rio de Janeiro: Nova Fronteira; 1999.

Scherer MJ, Federici S. Why people use and don't use technologies: Introduction to the special issue on assistive technologies for cognition/cognitive support technologies. NeuroRehabilitation. 2015;37(3):315-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/NRE-151264

Costa CR, Ferreira FMRM, Bortolus MV, Carvalho MGR. Dispositivos de tecnologia assistiva: fatores relacionados ao abandono. Cad Ter Ocup UFSCar. 2015; 23(3):611-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4322/0104-4931.ctoAR0544

Carvalho FS, Kunz VC, Depieri TZ, Cervelini R. Prevalência de amputação em membros inferiores de causa vascular: análise de prontuários. Arq Ciênc Saúde. 2005;9(1):23-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25110/arqsaude.v9i1.2005.215

Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Diretrizes de atenção à pessoa amputada. Brasília (DF): Ministério da Saúde; 2013.

Santos KT, Soglia L. Sustentando-se nas lesões: problemas ocasionados pela biomecânica incorreta de próteses/órteses e cadeira de rodas. Rev EFDeport. 2012:16(164).

Feldhaus LC. Estudo e otimização do envoltório externo das próteses de antebraço [Monografia]. Pato Branco: Universidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná; 2017.

Tavares PC, Tormes LH, Araújo RA, Torres BR. Intervenção protética em amputação de membros superiores (MMSS). In: X Encontro de Iniciação à Docência; 2000; Recife. Anais. Recife: Universidade Federal do Pernambuco; 2000.

Bittencourt ZZLC, Cheirad DC, Montilha RCI, Gasparetto MERF. Expectativa quanto ao uso de tecnologia assistiva. Jorsen. 2016;16(S1):492-6.

Lustosa LP, Andrade MAP, Araújo MRN, Bonolo PF, Campos TVO, Araújo VL. Uso terapêutico de tecnologias assistivas: direitos das pessoas com deficiência e habilidade física e motora. Belo Horizonte: Nescon; 2015.

Scatolim RB, Santos JEG, Landim PC, Toledo TG, Fermino SCM, Cardozo D, et al. Legislação e tecnologias assistivas: aspectos que asseguram a acessibilidade dos portadores de deficiências. Rev NEaD-Unesp. 2016;2(1):227-48.

Published

2018-12-31

Issue

Section

Original Article

How to Cite

1.
Missio MM, Queiroz LF de. Assistive technologies: aspects influencing assurance and abandonment of resources. Acta Fisiátr. [Internet]. 2018 Dec. 31 [cited 2024 May 21];25(4):185-90. Available from: https://revistas.usp.br/actafisiatrica/article/view/163858